Pauly's Templeton Watch

My Name is Paul H Cosentino. I started this Blog in 2011 because of what I believe to be wrongdoings in town government. This Blog is to keep the citizens of Templeton informed. It is also for the citizens of Templeton to post their comments and concerns.

Brookfield man suing town over order to remove sign

BROOKFIELD – A local resident is suing the town and the Zoning Board
of Appeals seeking to overturn a ruling ordering him to, among other
things, take down a sign that has been at the center of controversy for
years.

John D. Holdcraft this week filed the lawsuit in Worcester
Superior Court. It was also signed by Mr. Holdcraft’s counsel, James P.
Ehrhard of Ehrhard & Associates in Worcester.

For years,
various selectmen, municipal employees and regular citizens have butted
heads with Mr. Holdcraft for derogatorily mentioning them by name on the
8-by-4-foot double-sided sign on his property facing Route 9.

The
Zoning Board of Appeals sometime around July 16, 2003, granted the
special permit to Mr. Holdcraft for his property located at 6 South
Maple St.

Included among the conditions were: building a shed (8
feet high, 8 feet wide and 27 feet long) to operate a “Retail Service
for Charitable Reasons” business; having a sign stating “Retail Service
for Charitable Reasons” to conform to the town’s zoning bylaws; and
being granted a two-year special permit subject to renewal for another
two years, if Mr. Holdcraft fully complied with the permit.

The special permit and subsequent extension expired Dec. 31, 2005.

According
to the lawsuit, Mr. Holdcraft was able to use the shed and the property
surrounding it in “quiet enjoyment” until March 21, approximately 12
years after the extension was granted.

But all of that changed
when one of Mr. Holdcraft’s main targets on his sign, Selectman Clarence
R. Snyder III, made a written request for Zoning Enforcement Officer
Nicholas Thomo to issue a cease-and-desist order against Mr. Holdcraft
for conducting “an illegal business with illegal signage” and order the
removal of the business, shed and signage from the premises.

On April 3, Mr. Thomo sided with Mr. Snyder and issued a cease-and-desist order.

According to Mr. Thomo’s letter, Mr. Holdcraft violated conditions of
the permit by failing to provide appropriate landscaping and signage on
the property and to ensure no items were to be left outside.

Mr.
Holdcraft was ordered to bring the property into compliance with the
conditions of the original special permit, including appropriate
landscaping and signage.

In his “administrative appeal” to ZBA
Chairman Charles Wilson, Mr. Snyder further pointed out that the
cease-and-desist order did not address the primary issue of whether the
special permit had expired on Dec. 31, 2005.

The suit expounds on
Mr. Snyder writing in his administrative appeal that he was “aggrieved”
by the decision, while never stating how he was aggrieved. The suit
alleges that Mr. Snyder is not aggrieved in any way.

“It is truly only about taking down Holdcraft’s sign so that elected
Selectman Snyder cannot be criticized under the First Amendment,” the
suit states. “The ZBA members were obviously happy to do their
Selectmen’s bidding.”

Another point the suit makes is the ZBA
“never sent any notice whatsoever,” via U.S. mail or constable, to Mr.
Holdcraft, abutters or interested parties about the hearing on July 19
and the continuation of the hearing on Aug. 1 and 2.

However, the
suit mentions that Mr. Holdcraft was handed by a constable prior to the
Aug. 2 meeting a notice that the Aug. 2 meeting was going to be
continued to Aug. 16.

On Aug. 16, the ZBA ruled 4 to 1 in favor of Mr. Snyder’s complaint.

The suit’s final argument alleges that the statute of limitations,
regarding the building permits and special permits under Mass. General
Law, had long ended.

The suit claims that the ZBA had no basis to
overturn the decision of the zoning enforcement officer and grant
Snyder’s complaint, and the ZBA ruled incorrectly and without foundation
that Mr. Holdcraft must take down his building and no longer use the
property as he has for more than 12 years.

“What we have here is a
sitting selectman (Mr. Snyder) attempting to use the authority of the
Zoning Board of Appeals to take away Mr. Holdcraft’s property and
livelihood for no other reason than to silence a town resident who
speaks out against him,” Mr. Ehrhard said. “Snyder and his friends on
the ZBA left Mr. Holdcraft no other option but to go to court. And the
ZBA is spending Brookfield taxpayer dollars to fight Snyder’s battle for
him. The whole thing is a clown show.”

Why the NFL Suddenly Wants to Pay Taxes

The NFL announced Tuesday that it's voluntarily relinquishing its tax-exempt status. Here's what you need to know about the move.

Why in the world would the NFL volunteer to pay taxes?

Basically,
the economic value of the exemption wasn’t worth the political and PR
headaches that it created. In a memo to the league’s teams and members
of Congress, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell called the tax-exemption a
“distraction,” and said it has “been mischaracterized repeatedly in
recent years.”

Is there truth to this?

Yes. Political threats to revoke the tax-exemption of pro sports
organizations hold populist appeal. After all, how can commercial
outfits that sell expensive tickets and generate millions of dollars for
owners and players be considered non-profit organizations – and thus
exempt from paying taxes? The NFL is no charity.

In
2013, Sen. Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma introduced legislation that would
prohibit the NFL and other pro sports organizations with over $10
million in revenue from filing as non-profits. In the wake of the Ray
Rice scandal last fall, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, a Democrat,
proposed similar legislation – and argued that taxes on these leagues
could fund domestic violence programs. Last month, Republican
Congressman Jason Chaffetz, House Oversight Committee Chairman, told Reuters that “the National Football League should have to pay taxes like everybody else.”

Politicians,
however, largely fail to explain the scope of these tax-exemptions –
which are much more limited than they may appear. The NFL's teams, who
see a bulk of the league’s $11 billion in revenue, are taxable entities.
So the NFL does pay taxes. The league office is tax-exempt, but it
generated just $9 million in income during the 2012 tax year.

So
repealing the NFL's tax exemption wouldn’t create the windfall
politicians want you to expect. If it saved the NFL a ton of money,
today’s voluntary relinquishing never would have happened. Recent
political posturing exaggerated its value.

Why was the NFL office tax-exempt in the first place?

The
NFL has historically filed as a 501 (c)(6) non-profit, which provides
tax-exemptions for “business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate
boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.” Er, how did
football get written into the tax code?

This
legislative quirk dates back to the 1966 NFL-AFL merger. “Professional
football leagues” were added to the code that year to ensure that the
merger could go forward “without fear of an anti-trust challenge under
either the Clayton Antitrust Act or the Federal Trade Commissions Act,”
and to ensure that “a professional football league’s exemption would not
be jeopardized because it administered a players’ pension fund,” according
to the Internal Revenue Service. In return for this favorable treatment
of the merger by two Democratic lawmakers -- Louisiana Senator Russell
Long, chairman of the Finance Committee, and Louisiana representative
Hale Boggs, House majority whip -- New Orleans was awarded the NFL’s
next expansion franchise.

Who’s the big winner here?

NFL
Commissioner Roger Goodell. Remember him calling the exemption a
distraction? Well, the largest distraction has been the required public
disclosure of his enormous compensation -- $44 million in 2012, and $35
million in 2013. When Goodell mishandles an issue like Ray Rice, his
paycheck is inevitably thrown in his face. How can a guy making that
much money screw up so badly? The commissioner’s pay is also a sore
point during collective bargaining negotiations.

Monday, September 25, 2017

Take
a little trip to Valley Forge in January. If you don't know where that is, just
Google it from the sidelines. Hold a musket ball in your fingers and imagine it
piercing your flesh and breaking a bone or two. There won't be a doctor or
trainer to assist you until after the battle, so just wait your turn.Take your
cleats and socks off to get a real experience. Then take a knee.

Then, take one at the beach in Normandy where man after American man stormed
the beach, even as the one in front of him was shot to pieces...the very sea
stained with American blood. The only blockers most had were the dead bodies in
front of them, riddled with bullets from enemy fire.

Take a knee in the sweat soaked jungles of Vietnam. from Khe San to
Saigon...Anywhere will do. Americans died in all those jungles.There was no
playbook that told them what was next, but they knew what flag they represented
When they came home, they were protested as well..and spit on for reasons only
cowards know.

Take another knee in the blood drenched sands of Fallujah in 110 degree
heat..Wear your Kevlar helmet and battle dress...Your number won't be printed
on it unless your number is up! You'll need to stay hydrated but there won't be
anyone to squirt Gatorade into your mouth. You're on your own.

There's a lot of places to take a knee. Americans have given their lives all
over the world. When you use the banner under which they fought as a source for
your displeasure, you dishonor the memories of those who bled for the very
freedoms you have. That's what the red stripes mean. They represent the blood
of those who spilled a sea of it defending your liberty.

While you're on your knee, pray for those that came before you, not on a
manicured lawn striped and printed with numbers to announce every inch of
ground taken...but on nameless hills and bloodied beaches and sweltering
forests and bitter cold mountains...every inch marked by an American life lost
serving that flag you protest.

No cheerleaders, no announcers, no coaches, no fans...just American men and
women...delivering the real fight against those who chose to harm us...blazing
a path so you would have the right to "take a knee."

You haven't an inkling what it took to get you where you are...but your
"protest" is duly noted. Not only is it disgraceful to a nation of
real heroes, it serves the purpose of pointing to your ingratitude for those
who chose to defend you under that banner that will still wave long after your
jersey is retired...

If you really feel the need to take a knee, come with me to church on Sunday
and we'll both kneel before Almighty God. We'll thank him for preserving this
country for as long as He has. We'll beg forgiveness for our ingratitude for
all He has provided us. We'll appeal to Him for understanding and wisdom. We'll
pray for liberty and justice for all...because He is the one who provides those
things.

But there will be no protest. There will only be gratitude for His provision
and a plea for His continued grace and mercy on the land of the free and the
home of the brave. It goes like this...